ATK/EADS: Liberty Launch Vehicle Update Thread

[joek]

The spacecraft and the cargo are very interesting, and the most different to any of the other CCP proposals with probably the exception of Dreamchaser.

Huh? SpaceX offers cargo transfer in the trunk also. And they can extend the trunk as needed for NASA needs.

Not pressurized (at least not proposed yet).

[apace]

The spacecraft and the cargo are very interesting, and the most different to any of the other CCP proposals with probably the exception of Dreamchaser.

Huh? SpaceX offers cargo transfer in the trunk also. And they can extend the trunk as needed for NASA needs.

Not pressurized (at least not proposed yet).

Right, ATK has a good PR department.

[Ronsmytheiii]

The spacecraft and the cargo are very interesting, and the most different to any of the other CCP proposals with probably the exception of Dreamchaser.

Huh? SpaceX offers cargo transfer in the trunk also. And they can extend the trunk as needed for NASA needs.

Not pressurized (at least not proposed yet).

Right, ATK has a good PR department.

The PR department doesn't design the thing, they just market it. ATK is designing a craft that does multiple jobs in one flight (ie CRS and CCP) whether good or not is up to the Commercial Crew office.

[Lars_J]

he concept kind of reminds me of HTV, except with a pressurized cargo container instead of the unpressurized part.

The concept reminds me more of a capsule with a minimalist shuttle cargo bay attached.

[baldusi]

They might get a dual contract, a single contract, half a contract or nothing. But you can't fault them for trying. This is competition at its best. The one "left behind" tries to make a better proposal than the others to leap ahead.
Personally, I don't think the system is mature enough for Crew if you want it fast, and Liberty has a very limited market (US LEO) on an overcrowded market (EELV/Falcon) with excess capacity that's not really needed. But as a concept it's very good. I love to see them trying good ideas (from a business point of view).

[joek]

Right, ATK has a good PR department.

No argument, although the idea probably didn't originate there.*  Nevertheless, it is interesting, and can't fault them for trying.  I'm sure we'll see plenty of dueling CGI's in the future.  Maybe similar exists in other CCiCap proposals as a way to help bolster the potential future business case.  In any case, we should know the opinion of the CCiCap selection board soon  enough.


* Old joke: What's the difference between sales and marketing?  Sales knows when they're lying.

[MP99]

CAIB. Said that crew shouldn't be put at risk to deliver cargo when it wasn't necessary. At a headline level, could make problems for them, even if it's not truly the intent of that CAIB finding.

A few of things:

1) The capsule will still be able to abort away, just like Orion and any other one.

Yup, that's what I said, too. Crew wouldn't be launching to enable cargo, nor would they be greatly endangered by it if it is completely inert and can be left behind in an abort.

even if it's not truly the intent of that CAIB finding.

However, there's also the question whether a 10t launcher would be safer to launch crew on than a 20t launcher with spare capacity for cargo, too.

As a general rule, ISTM a smaller launcher may well be safer (less engines, lower chamber pressures, etc, etc). However, Liberty is different enough to liquid rockets that we could argue that back and forth all day without coming to an answer...

cheers, Martin

[Prober]

The spacecraft and the cargo are very interesting, and the most different to any of the other CCP proposals with probably the exception of Dreamchaser.

Huh? SpaceX offers cargo transfer in the trunk also. And they can extend the trunk as needed for NASA needs.

Not pressurized (at least not proposed yet).

Right, ATK has a good PR department.

Thats what this might be some PR work, just like the folks at SpaceX are talking BEO.....both really don't matter as the contract goes for crew transport only. 
 
But to show some of what ATK can do its good PR for that.
 

[beancounter]

The spacecraft and the cargo are very interesting, and the most different to any of the other CCP proposals with probably the exception of Dreamchaser.

Huh? SpaceX offers cargo transfer in the trunk also. And they can extend the trunk as needed for NASA needs.

Not pressurized (at least not proposed yet).

Right, ATK has a good PR department.

Thats what this might be some PR work, just like the folks at SpaceX are talking BEO.....both really don't matter as the contract goes for crew transport only. 
 
But to show some of what ATK can do its good PR for that.
 

Can do??!!  We don't know that yet! 

[simonbp]

Oh, I'm quite sure they (ATK & EADS) can make it all work technically. It's less certain what the budget and schedule would look like afterwards...

[Kaputnik]

Whilst everyone is congratulating ATK on having invented a new concept in pressurised cargo delivery, you may want to remember that some of the DIRECT guys were pushing an identical concept a few years ago.

[Lars_J]

Similar but not identical. I don't think they ever proposed putting cargo between Orion's CM and SM.

[Ben the Space Brit]

The way I see it, it has to be unpressurised cargo.  There's no way the SSRMS could manoeuvre a pressurised cargo module out from behind the re-entry module; the utility spines linking it to the SM just make it too narrow a squeeze.

That's not a bad thing.  Remember, the only unpressurised upmass vehicle at the moment is Dragon.  The Liberty CV could hypothetically carry larger and heavier unpressurised cargo.  It at least gives options if nothing else.

FWIW, even if the launch vehicle doesn't make it for engineering, safety or budgetary reasons, the spacecraft itself is looking better and better; worth pursuing in its own right.  At circa 20t to LEO maximum it could also ride on an Ariane-5, D-IVH or Atlas-VH.  Is there a contractor lined up for the CV yet?

[pippin]

The way I see it, it has to be unpressurised cargo.  There's no way the SSRMS could manoeuvre a pressurised cargo module out from behind the re-entry module; the utility spines linking it to the SM just make it too narrow a squeeze.

But that's exactly what their press release image shows.

[Kaputnik]

Similar but not identical. I don't think they ever proposed putting cargo between Orion's CM and SM.

Maybe not an official DIRECT proposal but I recall a discussion about a cargo module put between the SM and CM. It may have been Norm Hartnett, on this forum, who suggested it, but I can't find it now.

[rmencos]

The delivery of pressurized cargo is a great concept, but I don't see it as a relevant factor in any upcoming CCDev contracts.  Any milestones will deal only with the Liberty Rocket and the proposed capsule and not with this extended cargo version.  As some have said, it's good PR - really something that would not be developed for many years.

ATK has made back to back to back news releases about its program lately. And the cargo capability news release is something they could have done at any point.  I wonder what the angle is - simple promotion pre-CCDev awards?

Happy 4th of July all!

[docmordrid]

Sounds like a "me too, and one better (pressurized)" vs. Dragon's trunk, though ISTM a pressurized container for stowage in Dragon's extended trunk would be the natural counter.

[baldusi]

I'm saying it again, nothing new, from a technical POV. The whole issue is having the guts to present this as a sound business case. Liberty is too big for crew, but mixing it with cargo it might even be quite economical.
Of course Dragon on a Falcon Heavy with a 5m pressurized trunk could do this and probably more. Or a CST-100 could do the same with an Atlas V 552. But they have made a very reasonable case.
Please remember that just six months ago we thought they only had a LV on paper. I'm not saying that all of their proposal still looks like "good on paper". But at least they have made a whole system that takes the whole needs of the ISS in consideration.
We can't really say anything without knowing their bid. But if you think of the 2016 to 2020 time frame, and specially if you believe that ISS has a reasonable probability of being extended to 2025, this might be something worth looking into. Worth looking into is not something to chose blindly. But I would give them the chance to go on.

[joek]

The delivery of pressurized cargo is a great concept, but I don't see it as a relevant factor in any upcoming CCDev contracts.  Any milestones will deal only with the Liberty Rocket and the proposed capsule and not with this extended cargo version.

True, but to get a CCiCap award with those milestones, you first have to get selected.  All other things nominally equal, going above and beyond can help.  While all things were not equal, it's worth noting that in the CCDev-2 selection statement, e.g., SNC's 7-crew configuration with the ability to "trade out cargo and crew" and use of "a more modest Atlas V variant" were some of the reasons stated for their selection over OSC.

[Chris Bergin]

Article on Liberty's state of play:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/07/atk-us-space-flight-independence-liberty/

Will set up a new thread in this section, so anything specific to the article can be discussed in that new thread.